Advertisment2

Google+ Followers

"Believing Christians should look upon themselves as such a creative minority and ... espouse once again the best of its heritage, thereby being at the service of humankind at large." --Joseph Ratzinger

40 comments:

According to a news article I found online, a man by this same name was one of three people represented in a lawsuit back in 2001 (I believe) in Chicago; the lawyer was suing the city for arresting peaceful panhandlers. The city tried to argue that the panhandlers had accosted people but had to back down when they didn't have evidence and nobody claimed they'd done anything more than this man does in the video; for the indignity of being arrested each of the homeless panhandlers got $500 from the city.

Also, though this video was made a year ago it has just gone viral, and users of the Reddit site have gone on a mission to find this guy and take care of him (job offer, etc.). That is *also* what Jesus looks like. Though the Lord wouldn't drop so many f-bombs (be warned, but this is still pretty amazing):

I can tell you what some people who "look like Jesus" do in my hometown:

1. They forced the closure of one of the city's two public libraries because they've used the grounds as a campsite.

2. Some use the bathrooms at the other public library to wash their naked torsos or defecate on the floor. One ate a raw can of Spam in front of a computer terminal. I witnessed these things myself and reported them to library authorities.

3. One group of professional panhandlers camps out near a Starbucks downtown. Know how I can tell they're not homeless? They have smart phones and laptops, which aren't cheap.

In Los Angeles, one panhandler attacked a man who refused to give him money and burned him to death:

I know there are legitimately homeless people out there who need help and support. Many of them are mentally ill. But many "homeless" people are nothing but lazy parasites with a sense of entitlement and no sense of consideration for society around them. They effectively steal from people who have difficulty paying their bills and feeding their families.

Unfortunately, the Catholic Church (as well as "progressive" politicians, academics and media members) promotes this guilt-induced sympathy as a means to empower itself. It always has. Like its liberal, secular counterparts, the Catholic Church doesn't give a damn about the poor! It doesn't view the poor as men and women created in God's image -- an image that includes at least a modicum of intelligence and talent -- but as puppy dogs who can do nothing for themselves and must be cared for 24/7.

Of course, some people are in such dire straits that they need such care -- especially the elderly, whom the Church conveniently fails to defend with the same "vigor" (if you can call it that) as it "defends" the unborn. But not every poor or "homeless" person does.

While society must be accountable to the poor, the poor also must be accountable to society. Of course, this notion isn't "Catholic," so it will be rejected automatically by the self-benighted "compassionate" people.

At the end of your life you aren't going to be judged by what the Church did or didn't do with regard to the poor (which is considerable, if you wish to look). As Saint John of the Cross said, you will be judged on your love (or your lack thereof).

Wow. A video whose intent is to get us to see the humanity in the homeless, and half the initial response is to dehumanize them.

Being poor doesn't make you an angel. The poor are human beings, just as prone to sin as anyone else. But the poor suffer the consequences of a fallen world all the more acutely, so the call of Jesus is to bring them the spiritual and corporal acts of mercy all the more emphatically.

Last month a 96 year old man in my town was beaten to death by a homeless woman who hung around the area. That poor man was trying to help her. Show mercy, yes, but don't be stupid. Don't get too close and if you give money do it in broad daylight in the middle of the street.

No, Jesus doesn't look like that. Jesus looks like the Father. Jesus is what we could look like if we work hard at perfecting ourselves in cooperation with the Holy Spirit. This man looks like one of the poor, the sort of people we will always have with us, and the sort of people we do need to be charitable towards. They are part of the story, but they are not the story.

It would appear, Joseph, that Catholics have by no means cornered the market on self-righteousness.

I don't like repeating myself but will say it again - if you can't see the Catholic Church as one of the few forces for good in helping the poor, you are willfully blind.

You appear to be very selective in the miseries that you would allow yourself to feel sympathy for, without really knowing any of these people personally. How sad. Christ didn't condone sin, but He met everyone "where they were" and made no demands for "social accountability", whatever that is. The people He reserved His greatest anger for were the Pharissees because they saw themselves as superior when in fact thay were greater sinners than those they condemned Do you notice any parallels?

I hope Christ meets you where you are. It seems an otherwise unhappy and friendless place.

You ask: since when does "love" disregard a reasonable demand for social accountability?

A fair question. You may find the answer below. I don't see the word "demand" anywhere in it. I do, however, detect in your posts many of the things that love is not.

Love is patient, love is kind and is not jealous; love does not brag and is not arrogant, does not act unbecomingly; it does not seek its own, is not provoked, does not take into account a wrong suffered, does not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth; bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

Vanessa, I was baptized as a Catholic, went to a Catholic high school, participated in my university's Newman Club and worshipped as a Catholic most of my life. I would say I know a lot more about Catholics and Catholicism than you could ever surmise.

Anonymous, the same God who inspired St. Paul to write what he did is the exact same God who demands accountability for human behavior. The Jesus who refused to condemn the woman caught in adultery by a lynch mob of Pharisees also told her to "go and sin no more." The Jesus who healed a paralytic at the pool in Bethesda also told him to "stop sinning or something worse will befall" him. Aren't those implicit demands for accountability? Do you seriously believe that either the paralytic or the adulteress were rich?

Moreover, since when is it "loving" to ignore deliberately occasions when homeless people violate accepted standards of social behavior, intimidate people for money or act as if they're not accountable. If the story about a man being burned alive in his SUV because he refused to give a panhandler money doesn't move you, then your "compassion" is based on materialism, not morality.

You think I mean that all homeless behave this way. Of course, they don't. I've met all sorts of homeless people in my life, from the mentally ill to families living from paycheck to paycheck, to those who will game the system for their own benefit.

...if you can't see the Catholic Church as one of the few forces for good in helping the poor, you are willfully blind.

How has the Catholic Church helped the poor to see themselves as people created in the image of a God who gave them talent, free will, intelligence and initiative? How has it helped the poor to develop their individual talents not only to benefit society but, also, themselves? How has it, by doing so, stimulated the confidence of such poor people?

Does the Catholic Church ever teach the poor how to fish, to paraphrase a well-known proverb?

1. Why didn't Mother Teresa use the millions that she raised on her worldwide travels to build a clinic that really treat people, instead of providing mere palative care?

2. As I asked earlier, why doesn't the Vatican sell some of the stocks, bonds and securities it owns -- as well as some of its shares in various holding companies and businesses -- and direct the proceeds to archdioceses that need the money to keep schools and parishes open?

People without homes are not a morally monolithic groil of people. Ditto with those who beg. We ought to help those we can but that might mean in a particular case, not giving them money and helping them to find better ways of getting money. Some of those who beg are mentally ill and need care; others are drug addicts and need to get off drugs.

Like Joseph, I didn't learn a damn thing about the Catholic Church or Faith in Catholic schools. We held hands and sang, "Kumbaya". Later I read Aquinas and Augustine, Aristotle, Teresa, Therese, John of the Cross and many others to learn the truth. You can see why Josoeph is so angry -- He was deprived of a real Catholic education and now he is shallow and emotional. I've so been there...

Fourth, can you say, "clerical sex-abuse crisis"? Can you also say, "St. Peter Damian" and "'The Book of Gomorrah'"? I knew you could...

Fifth, Jesus did not found the Catholic Church. In the 1880s, Pope Leo XIII had this terrifying vision of Satan talking to Jesus:

Satan: I can destroy the Catholic ChurchJesus: You can? Then go ahead.Satan: I need time and I need power.Jesus: How much time and how much power?Satan: I need a century and the power to control those who will give themselves over to me.Jesus: You have the time. You have the power. Do what you want.

Because of that vision, Pope Leo composed the Prayer to St. Michael the Archangel. The whole scenario begs two questions:

1. If archangels are loyal subordinates of the Triune God, and one Person of that Triune God gives Satan permisssion to do anything, is an archangel seriously going to countermand that permission?

2. If those who “belong to Jesus” (for lack of a better phrase) receive the Father's protection according to John 10: 28-29….

I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand.

…then why would Jesus give Satan permission to destroy the Catholic Church, especially if Jesus founded it and said He would protect it?

Either Jesus is lying or the Catholic Church is an apostate imitation of what He intended. No other conclusion is tenable.

You, Vince, have been seduced by Catholicism's intellectual facade, which hides the corruption, malfeasance and moral filth within.

The Catholic Church is nothing but a religious Mafia operated by and for the bishops and their clericalist sycophants. It long ago sacrificed its spiritual patrimony on the altar of wealth, power, prestige, secular influence, monarchistic trappings and institutional arrogance. It is ripe for judgement by a holy, righteous God...and that judgement will be severe, powerful and unrelenting.

As far as the homeless man in the clip is concerned, does he know about private or public agencies that can help him get "cleaned up" and made presentable for interviews? Do they know about him? Somebody in Chicago needs to make the connection. This man doesn't have to be homeless.

You know what's fascinating? All of you respond to legitimate criticism of the Catholic Church with personal criticism of me. I assure you that if I had never been born, the church would act no differently than I described; it has done so for centuries.

Wake up, people! Your church membership will not save you. Only Jesus Christ can. Time is short. Fight for Jesus -- and against your church authorities -- or risk divine judgement.

Piece of advice: if you're going to attack the spiritual authority of the Catholic Church you should avoid relying on the visions of 19th century popes. It sounds less like "legitimate criticism" and more like insane hypocrisy.

Joseph, I agree with gothmog. I am very curious why when you are very skeptical about many other things you take that supposed vision of Pope Leo the thirteenth seriously and believe those really are Jesus' words?

People have attempted to trace that story with no luck. It seems fair to assume it's a pious fabrication. This wikipedia link is the best I can do at the moment, although the first deconstruction of the pious fable that I read was from a more mainstream source than wikipedia - wish I could remember where. This will give you the idea, though: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prayer_to_Saint_Michael Scroll to "speculation about the origin of the prayers."

The best attested evidence we have for words spoken by Jesus are those recorded by those who knew Him while He was on earth - Sacred Scripture. If you have found something in Scripture that you think indicates the Catholic Church is not the Church founded by Christ, well, while I would disagree with the conclusion but would at least agree that you were starting on the right basis.

But to use a vision other people claim a Pope had (that the Pope himself did not claim to have had). Well. That's just not a real strong basis for drawing conclusions against the Church's divine origins.

Well, if it's a pious fabrication, then why was the Prayer to St. Michael the Archangel ever accepted? Now, if the pope was hallucinating and his subordinates felt the need to cover for him, I can understand that. But that's the only reasonable counter-explanation.

BTW, my criticism isn't based solely on one pope's vision. It's based on a lot of more substantial factors that I've mentioned earlier and that nobody can deny.

Speaking of denying...

Denial isn't just a river in Egypt. It's also a river that runs right through Rome... and has a lot of Catholic bloggers drinking out of it.

BTW, let's just assume for the sake of discussion that Jesus did found the Catholic Church. Do any of you seriously believe that He would be pleased with the goings-on of the last few centuries, especially at the top?

Let me put it another way. Did you know that God Himself "founded" the Israelite nation through Abraham and made a covenant with it through Moses, one that He said He would never abandon? Did you know that the Israelites flirted with (if not embrace outright, at times) idolatry for centuries?

How do you think God reacted? He allowed first the Assyrians, then the Babylonians, to conquer the Northern (Israel) and Southern (Judah) kingdoms, respectively, and send their residents into exile. Oh, by the way, the Babylonians destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple.

When the religious authorities of Jesus' day rejected Him in favor of their own political power and theological ideas, how do you think God reacted? See the above paragraph, only with the Romans in 70 A.D. playing the part of the Babylonians.

How much different do you think the Catholic hierarchy is from the first-century Pharisees? Do you think that Wuerl, Gumbleton, Mahony, Law, Weakland, Dolan et al are any different than Caiaphas and his lot?

God is not mocked, people. Your ostensibly privileged position as Catholics means nothing to Him. Rome is ripe for divine judgment; the blood of those sexually molested by priests over the centuries cries out for it. So are (metaphorically speaking) Wittenberg, Canterbury, Geneva, Moscow and Colorado Springs ripe.

Time is short, people. Do not fall into the traps of bad theology, disregard of Christ's sacrifice and intellectual fashion that so many Catholics, mainline Protestants and Orthodox have fallen into.

So, when Christ said that he would leave the Holy Spirit to guide and protect his Church I suppose what he really meant was that in roughly 1,500 years he would send the Holy Spirit to lead a group of dissident religious factions who largely define themselves as being separate from the institution which was officially founded in 325 AD and could draw direct lineage back to the earliest Christians? Maybe the Donatists had it right all along? Or maybe the Holy Spirit was just waiting for you to preach the Truth?

Since your primary issue with the Church appears to revolve around the clerical abuses which have plagued the Church for centuries I will address this issue. Unfortunately, I have some bad news: God allows people to sin...even priests. The Church is an institution administered by fallible humans, and in 2,000 years of history there have been horrible tragedies as well as great triumphs. We can either choose to accept this fact and do our best to overcome the evil of a fallen world or we can...become you? I would also point out that St. Peter Damian didn't run away from the the Church. Rather, he spent his life fighting to reform the Catholic hierarchy in the name of Christ. He probably wouldn't be too pleased with the modern Church, but I doubt he would support abandoning and openly attacking it.

And I feel silly being forced to point this out but...even if Rome were struck by Divine Judgement it would not necessarily negate the original contract between Christ and his followers. The Hebrews were named as God's chosen people, and in spite of their many failures and punishments God did not abandon them.

It must be very frustrating when people don't appreciate your "legitimate" and "undeniable" arguments. You must feel a little like Noah...or that crazy guy with the doomsday sign by the highway.

Gothmog, so what that "God allows people to sin"? God created people in His image, which includes free will. But that certainly doesn't mean God isn't distressed or angered by people who claim authority in His name, yet misuse that authority to feather their own nests and refuse to look at particularly grotesque sin among their own leaders.

The clerical sex-abuse crisis -- which, as I pointed out is at least a millenium old -- reflect a far more pervasive evil than solely the sex abuse. It demonstrates that the Catholic Church is not a fundamentally moral institution. Catholicism (especially in the leadership cadre) is not about morality; it's about power, pride of membership and blind obedience to superiors who spout a bunch of esoteric nonsense that might or might not reflect divine revelation.

That's why I left, not solely because of the sex-abuse crisis. Besides, fighting from within is impossible because many (if not most) Catholics -- such as you, for example, gothmog -- refuse even to admit that the problem exists, let alone confront it.

Of course, other churches have such problems but Catholicism claims to be the "One True Church" that proclaims "the fullness of the Gospel." Well, how can make such claims when it can't even get basic morality right?

Judgement falls first on the House of God. St. Peter wrote that and quoted Isaiah in doing so. The Catholic Church can't have it both ways. It can't claim to be the "One True Church" and act as if it's immune from divine judgement for its theological and pastoral malfeasance.

Regarding the pope's vision, visions are for the benefit of the visionaries. Why do you think that the pope was allowed to see or hear this? Especially if "The Catholic Church is nothing but a religious Mafia operated by and for the bishops and their clericalist sycophants." It seems to me most likely that this entire vision was for the benefit of the pope and the Church, to warn us about difficult times. The meaning of ALL divine revelation must be discerned in light of previous divine revelation. Christ has said that his Church would not be destroyed. Therefore She will not be.

You also say, "it long ago sacrificed its spiritual patrimony on the altar of wealth, power, prestige, secular influence, monarchistic trappings and institutional arrogance." OK, so at what point, exactly, did it become a danger to a person's salvation to be a member of the Catholic Church?

You seem to take that pope's vision quite seriously. If I were you, I would consider carefully that in the context of that vision you are on the side of the Devil, attempting to destroy the Catholic Church.

All told, this would equal about $30 billion. So how does that slice compare to the entire pie?

National Center for Charitable Statistics researchers tallied up expenditures by nonprofits in the broad category of "human services," which includes nutrition, employment assistance, legal aid, housing, disaster relief and youth development. In 2010, the most recent year available, they came up with total expenditures of $168 billion in that category.

So by our estimate, Catholic-affiliated charity amounts to 17 percent of the funds spent by nonprofits on social service"

@Joe. You make my day. For someone who claims that others misunderstand them you're certainly quick to suggest that I don't care about the clerical abuses. I do. I converted to the Catholic Church while the scandal was in the midst of breaking years ago, and I had to answer to my entire family while they asked me "why" and pointed at the news. The clerics responsible for this tragedy and all such tragedy will be held accountable before God, and His condemnation will fall more heavily upon them than anything I could ever do or say. I've come to terms with that. It's a shame that you couldn't.

....visions are for the benefit of the visionaries. Why do you think that the pope was allowed to see or hear this? Especially if "The Catholic Church is nothing but a religious Mafia operated by and for the bishops and their clericalist sycophants." It seems to me most likely that this entire vision was for the benefit of the pope and the Church, to warn us about difficult times. The meaning of ALL divine revelation must be discerned in light of previous divine revelation. Christ has said that his Church would not be destroyed. Therefore She will not be.

Well, John, if what you say is true, then why hasn't the hierarchy repented of its institutional arrogance, monarchist trappings and obsession with power and wealth? The behavior of bishops when confronted with sexual sin by their priests shows that they haven't. Not until their financial holdings were threatened did they even try to do something!

As far as discerning revelation in the context of previous revelation...well, as I suggested to gothmog, read Ezekiel 34 and 1 Samuel 2: 12-36, when Catholicism didn't exist. Then tell me how the behavior of bishops and popes over the centuries is any different.

While you're at it, try to explain to me how John Paul II's arbitrary, revisionist, abolitionist position on capital punishment for murder fits your paradigm concerning revelation, considering that it contradicts teaching from such notables as Thomas Aquinas and Augustine, let alone Genesis 9:5-6.

You're right in saying that "God's Church will not be destroyed." Who says that Catholicism is "God's Church"? Just because of the self-serving way that church interprets Matthew 16: 18-19...which, btw, is not the only interpretation?

OK, so at what point, exactly, did it become a danger to a person's salvation to be a member of the Catholic Church?

Why don't you start with an Internet search on the term "papal pornocracy," then get back to me.

I would consider carefully that in the context of that vision you are on the side of the Devil, attempting to destroy the Catholic Church.

John, I suggest you start reading anything by Malachi Martin, a witness to Vatican II and a distinguished scholar. Martin effectively states that Satan already is in the Church! Besides, even if Martin is wrong, the Catholic Church has effectively destroyed itself.

Anonymous, you mention Catholic Charities, which once has a solid adoption service. Because of the church's stance against same-sex marriage, CC had to fold its adoption service if it wanted to continue receiving Federal money, since it would not grant adoptions to homosexual couples. The solution is simple: Catholic Charities should refuse Federal money! That way, it can maintain its adoption service without compromise.

But Catholic Charities' continued acceptance of Federal money, and the bishops' lack of insistence that the group refuse to do so, show what the leadership's priorities really are.

One final thing, John: Yahweh told Abraham that He would bless those who blessed him and his descendants, and He would curse those who cursed his descendants. Well, for centuries, anti-Semitism pervaded Holy Mother Church. It also pervaded Germany, Russia, Spain and the Islamic world, for starters.

Tell me if you can, John, how the latter four entities have experienced history. Now tell me why Yahweh should not consider Holy Mother Church in the same boat? Are not the problems Catholicism is experiencing today a possible divine judgment for how it treated Jews in the past?

The clerics responsible for this tragedy and all such tragedy will be held accountable before God, and His condemnation will fall more heavily upon them than anything I could ever do or say.

True, gothmog, but since when does divine condemnation relieve humanity of fighting for the innocent, especially when God's name is dragged through the mud by people who claim authority in that name?

It's a good thing that people like Fr. Tom Doyle and Stephen Brady (the president of the now-defunct Roman Catholic Faithful -- as differentiated from Voice Of The Faithful) didn't take the passive approach you took.

Pfffft. You seem to think I am far more influential than I actually am. Or maybe I should have gone out and killed one of these priests to prove...something. My moral superiority? What exactly did you do "for the innocent?" Running away from the problem isn't an answer. Anyone can run away from the problem. It solves nothing, but by all means wrap yourself in this cloak of self-righteous indignation and accuse others of mocking or otherwise ignoring God.